Book reviews

Eighteenth-century soldiers' diaries are sufficiently rare that historians of the military experience regard the publication of any new one as a noteworthy event, but this valuable journal deserves special notice for several reasons. First, Ira Gruber, a past master of Anglo-American military history, has edited the text with a sure hand, providing a superb introduction, dividing the text into chapters and contextualizing each one with a brief, deft headnote, and offering enough added information (including footnotes, a glossary, and a biographical appendix) to make the journal both enlightening and readable. Second, this diary, more than probably any other published account, carefully records the social life of the British army, opening a rare window into the behavior and mores of officers and men alike. Finally, the author of the diary, Captain John Peebles, emerges as a man of uncommon good sense and decency, whose opinions of American rebels and of British policymakers undergo a revolution of their own between 1776 and 1782. Through his account we glimpse both the frustrations of the army as a whole and the insights that an intelligent, humane man could glean from a brutal civil war. John Peebles, born in Ayrshire in 1739, entered the king's service during the Seven Years' War as a surgeon's mate in provincial and regular units in North America; at the end of the war he finally bought an ensign's commission in the 42d Regiment of Foot—the Black Watch. He was neither rich nor particularly well connected, and as a result was still a lieutenant in 1776, when his regiment was posted to America. He never advanced beyond captain, the rank at which he sold out of the army (after a year of bitter frustration) in 1782. At the age of forty-three he finally returned to his "dear little friend" and "sweety," Anna Hamilton, who had waited six years for his return. Along the way, Peebles witnessed or participated in the fighting around New York in 1776, the occupation of Newport in 1777, the battles of Brandywine and Monmouth in 1777 and 1778, the siege of Charleston in 1780, and a variety of small skirmishes as a member of foraging and security parties. The great actions and campaigns have been described by other diarists; thus Peebles's diary "refines" rather than redefines our sense of the operational history of the war (p. 6). Two of his battle pieces are indeed uniquely valuable. No other

175 > I port with our later improvements. But I soon found that these must be so numerous as to make it not worth the trouble. I cannot however withhold my praise from a treatise, which I never take up without pleasure. The work of Ravaton is excellent in its kind. Those of the late Mr. Hunter, and of Mr. John Bell on the same subjsct, notwithstanding their difference in some particulars, are also well worth'an attentive perusal. And perhaps in these four works will be found the substance of most, if not of nil, that can be collected from former writers ; freed from a number of errors, and enriched with many solid and judicious remarks. Many cases however, recorded in the Memoirs of the Iloyal Academy of Surgery at Paris, and in other works both in French and English (not forgetting the writings of old La Mottc, and Mr. Serjeant Wiseman) will be of use to the student, if the circumstances in them which arc of real importance be properly discriminated from the rest, and from the obsolete theories with which they are intermixed." Mr. C. divides his Treatise into two parts; the first is devoted to the consideration of the true nature and character of Gun-shot bounds, in which the Author treats of the " nature of wounds in general; the nature of contusion, laceration, haemorrhage, and fracture; the operation of extraneous substances on the living solid ; and the laws by which the course and effect of bodies in motion are necessarily determined." Mr. C. concludes his first part with the following observations. " From what has been said, may be seen the reason of that concussion or shock, (cbranlcmcnt) which is given, in many instances, to the whole system, by the infliction of a gun-shot wound, and which has been remarked by the best writers 011 this subject, to be often attended with grave, and even alarming effects ; extending not only over the injured part, but affecting the system at large. For as the resistance to the shot is atlorded, not only by the texture of the injured part, but also is in part made up by the connection this has with other parts, and with the whole body, these also will therefore participate in the violence; and they will do it so much the more, in proportion as the part immediately wounded, has from its attachments, its texture, elasticity, or importance to lift', a greater connection with the stability, or with the functions of the rest. Hence a shot striking against a tendon or a bone in one of the extremities, will produce a greater concussion than if it struck only against softer parts ; a shot striking against a muscle in action, will produce more concussion than if it struck against the same part of the same muscle iit rest; and a shot striking the head, or wounding the liver, lungs, or intestinal canal, will generally bring 011 an instantaneous derangement of the whole system, with which the functions of these parts are so closely connected.
" To all this must be added, an alarm and apprehension which immediately come upon the mind, which is often increased by the uncertainty Mr. Abcrnetlujs Surgical Observations.
Uncertainty of the patient abont his real state; but which, in wounds of some parts, the most determined courage is not always sufficient to withstand.

"
Having thus endeavoured to analyse the phamomena of a gun-sliojt wound, considering it first as a complicated species of violence committed on matter variously organized, and also to explain its effects as violence, committed on liv ing matter; and having pointed out the processes which naturally ensue from each of these circumstances respectively in order to shew the indications of cure which may be doduced from them, I shall now proceed to point out by what mode of treatment those indications may be most rationally and successfully pursued.'' In the second part, Mr. C. delivers the treatment of gun-shot wounds, which he does, as he has before done the description of them, with great clearness and precision. The importance of an arrangement of tumours leading to an accurate description of their appearance, history, and treatment, must be admitted by every one. Impressed with this idea, Mr. Abernethy has for some yfears past made use of the extensive opportunities the practice of St. Bartholomew's allows him to select his different specimens, to exhibit them at his lectures with an arrangement he now offers to the public at large. To this last he was prompted by a consideration of the importance of the subject, and that it could only be undertaken by men of such large opportunities, though others might comprehend it when demonstrated. A still further inducement was, that the minds of men have lately been laudably incited to the investigation of cancer, in hopes of discovering a cure, that the society instituted for that purpose have proposed certain, questions which the author has attempted to answer, and lastly, as * much collateral knowledge is required to investigate any subject with accuracy, that probably this paper may tend to point out the required distinctions, and furnish such collateral knowledge* After these preliminary observations, the author introduces his definition by a few remarks on his predecessors. " The subject of tumours occupies a considerable space in the works of the antient writers on medicine. They seem, however, to have considered the subject rather with regard to its name than its nature; for we find a great variety of dissimilar diseases collected, I cannot say arranged, under the same general title. The error V has descended to us, and even in Dr. Cullen's Nosology we find diseases of arteries, veins, glands, tendons, joints, and bones, brought together under one order, and designated by tl\e same name of tumours. Some of these also are merely enlargements ot natural parts; whilst others are entirely new productions, having no existence in the original composition of the body. We have, I believe, sufficient knowledge of the nature of these diseases to class them more scientifically; and as this has not yet, as far as I know, been done, I shall endeavour to supply the deficiency, " In the definition which I mean to give of tumours, I shall trespass as much against the usual import of the1 word, as nusologists have hitherto done in their classifications against the nature of the disease. For I shall restrict the surgical signification of the word tumour to such swellings as arise from some new production, which made no part of the original composition of the bod)-; and by this means I shall exclude all simple enlargements of bones, joints, glands, &c. Many enlargements of glands are however included in the definition, as they are found to be owing to a tumour growing in them, and either condensing the natural structure, or causingthe absorption of the original gland. Sometimes also the disease of the gland seems to produce an entire alteration of structure in the part; the natural organization being removed, and a newformed diseased structure substituted in its stead. In either of these cases the disease of the gland is designed to be included in the' definition; and the practical remarks which follow will equally apply to the same kind of diseased structure, whether it exists separately by itself, or occupies the situation of an original gland. The structure of tumours is also a part of morbid anatomy which deserves to be examined; since (as it did not come within the scope of the undertaking) it has not been fully discussed by Dr. Baillie in his very valuable treatise on that subject. Yet as he has given representations of glandular parts enlarged by a diseased structure of an entirely new formation ; so 1 shall have the advantage of referring the reader to his accurate and expressive representations of some of -those appearances which it is my purpose ?o describe.
There is an observation of this judicious and accurate writer which I shall take the liberty of inserting, since it justly appreciates the degree of utility of investigations like the present: he observes, 4 That the knowledge of morbid structure does not lead with certainty to the knowledge of morbid actions, although the one is the effect of the other; yet surely it lays the most solid foundation for prosecuting such enquiries with success. In proportion, therefore, as we shall become acquainted with the changes produced in the structure of parts from diseased actions, we shall be more likely to make some progress towards a knowledge of the actions themselves, although it must be very slowly." Nothing can be more just than these remarks, but we cannot help wishing the definition had been more pointed. If these .tumours, which are found to grow in glands, are new formed parts, (No. 66'.) N there the newly formed part alone requires removal, whilst in others the surrounding substance must be taken away, or a radical cure cannot, be effected. ^ " There is yet another circumstance deserving attention, before I proceed to the particular consideration of the subjectwhich isj that a tumour once formed, seems to be a sufficient causc of its own continuance and increase. The irritation which it causes in the contiguous parts, is likely to keep up that increased action of vessels which is necessary to its supply; and the larger it becomes, the more does it stimulate, and of course contribute to its own increase." These remarks lead our author to some reflections oh the mode of cure in the early stage of tumour. These are by topical bleeding and cold applications. After the increased action is thus subdued, he proposes stimulant remedies to promote absorption.
But if these tumours have really an economy of their own, we cannot easily conceive how application applied to the neighbouring parts can produce any lasting effect. After these remarks, Mr. Abernethy enters on his division, and still confining the word to substances which made no part of the original structure of the body, he denominates the first genus froni its firm and fleshy feel, sarcoma or sarcomatous tumour. This genus, he observes, contains many species. Those enumerated by our author are, Common vascular or organized sarcoma, adipose sarcoma, ?pancreatic sarcoma, mastoid or mammary sarcoma, tubcrculatcd sarcoma, medullary sarcoma (sometimes called soft cancer), carcinomatous sarcoma.
For the description of these we must refer our reader to the work, where he will find them illustrated with cases. The next gcniis of tumours under the order of local diseases is cncysted tumours. Though only one species is mentioned, yet it seems to Comprehend so' many varieties as might, we think, have authorised some divisions, if not into species, at least into varieties. Under the cases by which this ge'huS is illustrated, we have the word wen more than oiice^ Wc' sincerely wish a precise meaning were given to the word, or that we were informed, that by the term is meant a tumour of any of the above description. [ 180 ] London, 180-i.
It has been observed and acknowledged for two thousand years, that persons who have suffered repeated paroxysms of gout, very rarely became free from it during the remainder of their lives. This constitutes, in medical language, an incurable disease. There is no doubt that many persons, who have been attacked in the prime of life by this socra regina dolorum, have, by means of regimen, remained free from any repetition of their sufferings for several years ; and probably a large majority of such subjects might enjoy a similar exemption, if they possessed sufficient resolution to adhere strictly to the plan prescribed. The gout, however, notwithstanding the most rigid observance of regimen and temperance, will return at some time or other. These facts have been proved by sufficient time, observation, and experience. Another opinion, high!}'-injurious to the advancement of medical science, has unfortunately sprung out of the former. It is, that the gout is not only incurable, but that every attempt to mitigate the sufferings of the patient is attended with great danger. This opinion has paralysed the faculty of medicine, and opprobriated the profession for two hundred years at least. But the liberal, enlightened, and correct Heberden has given a testimony, which justifies his juniors in exerting themselves to seek after more successful means of mitigating at least the miserable. torments of arithritic sufferers. The valuable communication from Dr. Adams, contained in this Number, p. 141, on the efficacy of bark in relieving gout; the extract of aconite and cicuta, the vapour bath, the antiphlogistic plan of applying leeches and cold to the parts affected, all which have appeared in previous Numbers of our Journal, prove that the possibility of safely mitigating the tortures of gout is established beyond controversy. The author of the pamphlet before us has introduced a nexv article into the. materia medica, which, we believe, will be a valuable addition to it.
The exhibition and effects of this vegetable production have been witnessed by a considerable number of respectable medical practitioners, some of whom have used it in theirown cases; and the testimonies of the noblemen and gentlemen who have received unequivocal relief from the use of it, can leave no doubt in our minds that the proposed remedy merits particular attention, both from the profession and the public at large But here a question obtrudes itself, how. far any respectable practitioner is justified in using or recommending a medicinc, with the preparation and composition of which he is not familiar? All chemists know, that vegetable preparations cannot admit of any analysis which may lead to the slightest knowledge of their medicinal properties; and a chcmical analysis of mineral preparations can do no more than disgoves discover the ingredients; and we infer the virtues fiora the known analogy of similar preparations, which, must be loose ant unsa is^ factory. The only rational moans then by which the virtues o a proposed remedy can be investigated, are repeated and we served trials of it in the human subject. Mr. W. has pursue^ , plan; and as far as three or four years experience can esta j >s i medical fact, he has "proved his .medicine to be safe and efficacious.
?An Answer to Mr. Goldson; proving that Vaccination is a permanent Security against the Small-pox. By Jo/in Ring, Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London. 8vo. pp. 43. London, 1804. It might be expected that Mr. Ring's vigilant zeal in the cause of vaccination would be roused by Mr. Goldson's pointed attack on the utility of the Jennerean discovery, of which we gave an ample detail in our last number. The subject is so extensively important, and the attention excited by Mr. Goldson's publication has been so considerable, that we think it necessary, without delay, to statethe leading particulars of Mr. Ring's answer, and the objections, which he urges against the validity of Mr. Goldson's statements. In this, as in the former ease, we shall chiefly confine ourselves to a fair representation of the writer's arguments, and a few obser-1 vations on their consistency, leaving our readers to make their own inferences from what is advanced. We may premise that Mr. Ring'sdefence of vaccination against Mr. Goldson's statement, turns upon two points ; either that the vaccination was insufficient, owing to faulty matter, and irregularity in the progress of the vesicle ; or that the subsequent symptoms produced by small-pox v infection, were only such as the introduction of this poison might at any time produce on certain constitutions, however indisputably they might previously have gone through the.disorder.
Mr. Ii. first attempts entirely to vitiate the source of vaccine matter at Portsmouth. This, as we mentioned in our last Number, was sent by the Sick and Ilurt Board to Mr. Rickman atA Portsea. Of this Mr. R. observes, -, " Mr. Goldson thinks it a sufficient proof of the Portsmouth matter having been good, that it was sent thither by a public board : but he has not proved that it was not procured from some place, where the golden rule of Dr. .Tenner for taking matter was disregarded ; and where matter was frequently taken at so late a period, as to produce spurious pustules, and bring disgracc on the practice. " As Mr. Goldson has adduced no evidence that the matter was originally good, so he has offered none to prove that it did not remain on the lancets long enough to suffer injury before it was sent to Portsmouth. This was the more likely to happen, when it was taken in the worst mode possible, that is, on lancets ; and had two offices to go through ; at either of which these lancets N 3 might might have remained long enough to become rusty. Mr. Goldson himself justly observes, that the success of vaccination is easily defeated, either from the matter having been originally inefficacious, or from its being deteriorated, and suffering a decomposition by a variety of means. " With the matter received from London, Mr. Rickman inoculated five marines ; and, with matter taken from the arm of one of them, he inoculatcd Clarke, whose case was communicated to the Committee of the House of Cojnmons, This man, it was said, afterwards had the small-pox; and it is therefore an object of the first importance to ascertain, as fan as possible, whether he * ever had the cow-pock. " In order to form a proper judgment in this instance, it ought to l)e recollected, that the matter issused from a doubtful source ; that it was not taken till the 11th day, by which time it has often lost much of its virtue, and is apt to produce a spurious pustule ; and that the only witnesses of its effect were persons, who had not the least pretensions to any knowledge or experience in the practice. It is, therefore no wonder the House of Commons considered this case as of no weight, when placed in opposition to the strong evidence brought forward by Dr. Jenner. And again, " Mr. Goldson tells us, that in the course of his experiments, Mr. Rickman soon found the matter run rapidly into a purulent state after the eighth daij. No stronger proof can be given that it was not good. This was the source of the matter first used by Mr. Goldson, and other gentlemen in the neighbourhood of Portsmouth." In the usual progress of the vaccine vesicle, when no local injury happens fo the arm, the contained fluid is at no time purulent, but, on the contrary, quite limpid to the last day that it can be obtained. This circumstance affords some ground of suspicion as to the efficacy of the matter originally employed ; at the same time it is proper to state, that if Mr. poldson's account be correct, vaccine inoculation from the same source, has produced, in numerous instances, the perfect disease, and has proved a complete prophylactic against repeated exposure Io small-pox. Allowing the tacts, the contradiction can only be explained by admitting the possibility of both perfect and imperfect vaccination from a vitiated source, under similar circumstances, and in each case with an ,entirely regular progress of the inoculated vesicle The case of Mr. Grant's child conies next under consideration'.
It. was inoculated not with Portsmouth matter, but by Mr. Paytherus in London.
No doubt is thrown on the genuineness of the. matter here employed, and the perfect vaccination of the child. The eruption, which took place on the night between the sixth and seventh day, Mr. Pving attributes entirely to the cuticular infiamnuttion produced by the variolous poison, and which, as Dr. Jenner has acutely remarked, is excited much more speedily in ' constitutions previously variolated or vaccinated, than where the poison poison produces the true small pox ; and hence the rapidity of this inflammation is a pretty sure criterion of the constitution being secure from genuine variola. Mr. R. also points out, in the relation of this case, a small difference between Mr, Goldson's narration and that of Mr. Grant, the father of the child, in the time of the accession of the first symptoms of fever.
On the evening of the seventh day the child was attacked with rigor and fever, and on the following morning a few eruptions appeared.
On this Mr. R. remarks, " As to the rigor, it is a common effect of suppuration; and the small pimples which appeared the next day were, in all probability, nothing but a miliary eruption. This eruption, it is well known, is the natural consequence of a hot regimen; and, in the present instance, there was a hot regimen with a vengeance, "* First, the child was rubbed before a good fire ; then recourse was had to flannel and warm Madeira; and, lest any one stiinur lus should be wanting, an anodyne, as it is called, which commonly contains that powerful stimulus, opium, was administered by Mr. Goldson. With such an accumulation of heat, it is no wonder there were a few eruptions; it is rather a wonder the child Mas not covered with eruptions from head to foot.
" The small pimples which appeared, and caused such a terrible alarm, did not suppurate ; but, in three days time, were covered with a warty scurf, which was rubbed off the following ?evening. If this is the small-pox, it is a sort of small-pox never heard of till now." Mr. Ring proceeds to shew, by very satisfactory evidence, that the production of a local variolous pustule by inoculation after small-pox, occasionally of fever, and of a slight crop of pustules, is by no means an uncommon circumstance, and that the reason why we have had no more instances of such occurrences after variolous inoculation is, that the confidence in the efficacy of smallpox inoculation has been so complete, that few persons would give themselves the trouble of re-inoculation.
Having thus impeached the character of Portsmouth itiatfcr on. the one hand, and shewn the possibility of mere cuticular inflammation by small-pox matter producing constitutional affection on the other, Mr. R. passes over the rest of Mr. Goldson's cases (which are all those inoculated' by Mr. G. himself, and by Mr. Weymouth of Portsea) with very slight notice : either the vaccination was imperfect, or the subsequent disease was not genuine constitutional small-pox. One observation, however, requires some comment: in Mr. G's third case, the child, after supposed satisfactory vaccination, caught the small-pox, not by inoculation, but by casual contagion. Of course, cuticular inflammation i* here out of the question, and Mr. R. therefore denies the genuineness of the vaccine inoculation.
To prove it satisfactory, Mr. Goldson states, that two years afterwards the child slept with another child in $mall-pox for several days, wore the same night- 3Ir. Ring's Ansrcer to Mr. Goldson. cap, and, in short, was as much exposed to contagion as possible. On this Mr. Ring makes the following remark. " It is too ridiculous to conclude, that, because a child did not catch trie small-pox when she wore an. infected night-cap, she could never catch it while she lived ; and, unlesss gentlemen can bring better proofs than these of a temporary security arising from vaccination, they had better put on their own night-caps, and go to bed. " The truth is, that it is 110 uncommon circumstance fox a person to catch the small-pox who has resisted it before ; aiid even resisted it for a long time, in every form, and every degree of exposure.
Many a parent, after attending several children successively in the small-pox, and arriving at an advanced period ot lite, has at length fallen a victim to that disease." There is nothing very ridiculous in the supposition, that a child who has once resisted such a degree of small-pox contagion should be ever after secure from the disease: no practitioner afcer such a test would hesitate in asserting the high probability of future security throughout life; and we appeal to Mr. Ring's candour, whether he would not have used this circumstance as a most powerful argument for the permanent cfficacy of vaccination to any of his own patients, or to this very case, had not the event turned out so contrary to expectation. That we are not mistaken in this assertion, let us judge Mr. Ring from his own words. In his letter to Mr. Grant, here inserted, Mr. R. observes, " Pead, vaccinated by Dr. Jcnner more than six years, and Phipps, his first patient, vaccinated by him more than eight years ago, have been frequently put to the same tests with impunity.
In the spring of the present year, they were inoculated for the small-pox with matter in the most active state ; but they resisted infection. " These patients were all vaccinated with matter from the human subject. Time, therefore, has dccided the question, whether cow-pock matter degenerates in the human subject, and decided it against Mr. Goldson. " Instances out of number might be adduced, if necessary, in support of this position. The cow-pock is transfered by the milkers, not only from one. cow to another, but also from one farm to another ; which could not be the case, if the matter lost its virtue after the first remove from the cow. One instance lately occurred, which furnishes an incontrovertible proof, that vaccine matter, whether generated in the cow or in the human subject, is the ' same.
A woman lately applied to Dr. Jenner, who had the cow-pock when a child. She caught the disease by handling the rags which came off from her sister's fingers. Dr. Jenner inoculated her for the small-pox ; but she resisted the infection. ^ " 1 shall hore insert two other cases ; with which, as well as almost every thing else relative to the subject of vaccination, I have great reason to believe, both from the tenor of his pamphlet, and *rom intelligence I have received, Mr. Goldson and his friends are totally unacquainted. The first case, which was published by Dr. Barry, is as follows : A gardener, who lives with a gentleman of Dr. Barry's acquaintance, infected himself with the cow-pock, by rubbing himself against another person who had received the infection from the cow, from a conviction that it would preserve him against the small-pox. This happened several years ago.
Since that time he has often voluntarily exposed himself to the infection of the small pox, and even lain in the same bed with his children, when they were covered with it, but never caught the disease.
" The other case was published by Mr. Creaser. It was communicated to him by Mr. White, of Landsdown Place, Bath. About twenty-three years ago, John Bright, a labouring man, "W'hom Mr. White sometimesemploys, lived at a farm. His fellowservant, who had the cow-pock, communicated the distemper to him in a frolic, by means of a scratch on the hand. He has since been repeatedly inoculated for the small-poxf He has also had the disease in his family, and been exposed to it under its most malignant form, but still escaped infection." A very pointed evidence from the Vaccine Institution of Edinr hurgh is also given in favour of the undiminishing power of vaccination through, three, four, and even five years.
What then remains to be done by the advocates of vaccination ? Mr, Ring, it will be seen by the following passage, is for standing aloof aloof from all attempts by experiments at doing away the impression made on the public mind by Mr. Goldson's statement. " Mr. Goldson solicits the Vaccine Institution to make fresh experiments, in order to decide a question which is long since decided. What institution he means may, like a considerable part of his observations, admit uf a doubt. Whether there be any vaccine institution that will so far disgrace the cause, as to repeat such experiments at Mr. Goldson's request, and whether there br any vaccine institution that would not disgrace itself bv such an act, I shall not presume to determine; but the lloyal Jennerian Society have passed a resolution, that Mr. Goldson's pamphlet does not, at present, require any notice from them. I trust they will still adhere to that resolution: " Nec deus intersit, nisi dignus vindice nodus. " It docs not require a hundred able heads to plan, nor a hundred able hands to execute, the simple task of putting vaccine patients to the test. It is what any, head, however weak, can plan, and any hand, however unskilful, can execute.
But when we consider what a vast number of persoits have been vaccinated in this metropolis, and are daily exposed to the danger of catching the small-pox in the natural way, we cannot but deem it a work of supererogation to try such experiments again if they are innocent, and a crime to try them again if they are attended with danger." Probably the impression made by Mr. Goldson's cases will subside, and the appearance of contravening evidence will sooner or later be entirely lost in the daily accumulating mass of testimony in favour of vaccine inoculation pouring in from every quarter of the globe ; but why should any of the friends of this practice hesitate immediately to institute those experiments which may speedily put an end to the controversy ? Why should they think it "*viiliont any untoward accident, and many more hundreds, or thousands of instances, equally innoxious, may be added to tlie list. Even the cuticular inflammation and consequent symptoms, though as severe as in Mr. Goldson's cases, produce no mrre than a day or two of indisposition, and an eruption of a few pimples. Mr. Ring will surely not magnify these into a disease of very great moment ; and the only cases of danger which he brings are two from Ruchan, which, however authentic, are little adverted to, on account of the extreme rarity of the. occurrence.
The present pamphlet contains several other desultory remarks, for which we shall refer our readers to tho original ; and here we should close our account, if it were not incumbent upon us to repel an accusation which the Author has thought proper to bring against the manner in which we noticed Mr. Goldson's pamphlet in our last number. For this we must beg our reader's indulgence a short time longer.
We are first accused of inconsistency in exculpating the medical men of Portsmouth from the charge of'indifference to professional improvement, at the same time that we urge the local advantages for scientific information of a situation so near to the metropolis, and so constantly communicating with it. The truth seems to be, that it Mr. G's dates are accurate, tbe profession at Portsmouth can neither claim the merit of early exertions in vaccination, nor Vet are they liable to the reproach of culpable neglect. The accusation was trifling, and Mr. G's defence weak.
We are next charged with mistaking the object of Mr. Goldson's dedication. As Mr. G. himself has committed the mistake, (an unaccountable one we acknowledge) we cannot pretend to reconcile his contradictions; but though sent to Salisbury Square, we must still suppose that the author meant to dedicate his book to the Vaccine Pock Institution, for this obvious reason, that Mr. G. addressed his Remarks to some Institution expressly for Vaccination, which had existed long enough to be able to undertake those experiments of reinoculation that lie recommends. Accordingly, this respectable Society has taken Mr. G's dedication to itself, and has actu-r ally pursued the subject bv the sure path of experiment.
As we have no desire to sp^re ourselves any ot Mr. Ring's abuse, We shall insert the following.